Don2 (Don1 Revised)
Contributor
There's some talk that we're headed to WW3. I mean, if you compare to at least some of the previous world wars, there's a few things in common: such as strong alliances, possible smaller triggering events with different sides allied to bigger entities.
www.indiatoday.in
It seems like Musk's commentary is that we're "sleepwalking" into WW3 in that our proxy conflict with Russia is creating all kinds of factors that could trigger such an event. It's a bit of a strong statement. The author of the op-ed piece (second link) is not stating that WW3 is inevitable from the current conditions but instead that the actions in the Middle East along with other factors can plausibly escalate into something far bigger that we might call a WW3. The second author says it is not inevitable and he intends not to be an alarmist.
It's the latter less intense view that I wonder if it is worth considering. To put another way--what would be the minimum, viable path to WW3 from the current conditions of current conflicts, interests, tensions, and alliances? So, for example, many Muslim countries are very much on edge and anxious right now. For the most part, they want the conflict in Israel-Gaza to stop and see the continued deaths of civilians as a cause for something or at least their populations might. Turkey has ended nice diplomacy with Israel. What would it take for Turkey to leave an alliance with NATO and pursue better relations with Russia instead? What that be a factor? With the US potentially very distracted in the Middle East if things get hotter, would Russia and/or China use this as an opportunity for military occupations beyond what they are currently doing? Suppose that Iran sent a nuke at Israel seriously destroying Israel's impressive troop numbers. Would that trigger a cascade of events leading multiple countries on both sides into war?
To me, right now, it seems like both Russia and China might surreptitiously be involved in future instability in the Middle East, were it to start expanding in scope. However, I don't see larger scale than that. So, I am saying, there could be some triggering events to make this into a bigger Middle East war. (IMHO). Not inevitably, but plausibly. But I am not easily visualizing anything transforming the scope into a global phenomenon like a WW3. Perhaps I am wrong though. It's not like I am an expert.
So, if there were viable trigger events to grow this conflict into a broader Middle East conflict, what would those be? [My view is that I could see Iran getting more involved and perhaps some viable triggering events for conflict and "regime change" with Iran. BUT people in surrounding areas are far too factionalized to group together well beyond some populations in Syria, Yemen, mostly associated with Houthi people. Other Muslims may look on and be seriously disturbed by the events but not take action and so the scope might not become too large. There'd have to be something else triggering there, not sure what?] But then, after that, what would be other viable events that could increase the scope to global what would they be? [My view again is that I see China and Russia as keeping a bit of a low profile. So what would trigger them into more involvement?]
Elon Musk issues fresh warning, says we are sleepwalking our way into World War 3
Elon Musk has warned that the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict and the escalating tensions between Russia, China, and the US are pushing civilisation on the brink of World War 3.
Weingarten: Why Israel-Hamas war leading to World War III is not an alarmist view
Content warning: The following article contains mentions of war and death. In my last article, I made a case that the war between Israel-Hamas could potentially spur a greater conflict (World War III). This article is in response to those who may feel that this is an alarmist view. I must note...
iowastatedaily.com
It seems like Musk's commentary is that we're "sleepwalking" into WW3 in that our proxy conflict with Russia is creating all kinds of factors that could trigger such an event. It's a bit of a strong statement. The author of the op-ed piece (second link) is not stating that WW3 is inevitable from the current conditions but instead that the actions in the Middle East along with other factors can plausibly escalate into something far bigger that we might call a WW3. The second author says it is not inevitable and he intends not to be an alarmist.
It's the latter less intense view that I wonder if it is worth considering. To put another way--what would be the minimum, viable path to WW3 from the current conditions of current conflicts, interests, tensions, and alliances? So, for example, many Muslim countries are very much on edge and anxious right now. For the most part, they want the conflict in Israel-Gaza to stop and see the continued deaths of civilians as a cause for something or at least their populations might. Turkey has ended nice diplomacy with Israel. What would it take for Turkey to leave an alliance with NATO and pursue better relations with Russia instead? What that be a factor? With the US potentially very distracted in the Middle East if things get hotter, would Russia and/or China use this as an opportunity for military occupations beyond what they are currently doing? Suppose that Iran sent a nuke at Israel seriously destroying Israel's impressive troop numbers. Would that trigger a cascade of events leading multiple countries on both sides into war?
To me, right now, it seems like both Russia and China might surreptitiously be involved in future instability in the Middle East, were it to start expanding in scope. However, I don't see larger scale than that. So, I am saying, there could be some triggering events to make this into a bigger Middle East war. (IMHO). Not inevitably, but plausibly. But I am not easily visualizing anything transforming the scope into a global phenomenon like a WW3. Perhaps I am wrong though. It's not like I am an expert.
So, if there were viable trigger events to grow this conflict into a broader Middle East conflict, what would those be? [My view is that I could see Iran getting more involved and perhaps some viable triggering events for conflict and "regime change" with Iran. BUT people in surrounding areas are far too factionalized to group together well beyond some populations in Syria, Yemen, mostly associated with Houthi people. Other Muslims may look on and be seriously disturbed by the events but not take action and so the scope might not become too large. There'd have to be something else triggering there, not sure what?] But then, after that, what would be other viable events that could increase the scope to global what would they be? [My view again is that I see China and Russia as keeping a bit of a low profile. So what would trigger them into more involvement?]
